Herzog gives Talmud that survived the Holocaust to Yad Vashem

What is the difference between the Torah, Talmud, and Mishnah?

Marc Lipshitz Been involved in counter missionary work for 20+ years

First you need to understand what the Mishnah is. When Moshe received the Torah on Har Sinai he spent forty days and nights studying it and getting taught the performance and explanations of it. Thus when he came down he had two things- the written Torah and the explanations and details of its performance. The written Torah is what is also known as the “Chamishe Sifrei Torah”, commonly translated as “The Five Books of Moses”.

The explanations and details of performance were only passed on orally and are commonly referred to as the Oral Torah. Before the Bar Kochba revolt which resulted in the massive exile of the Jews 80 or so years after the destruction of the Second Temple Rabbi Akivah organized the oral law into a more organized and easier to teach format.

After the Bar Kochba revolt with the bulk of the Jews in exile in different places (the difference to the prior Babylonian exile was that there the bulk of the Jews were in one place, albeit outside of Israel) there was a fear that the oral Torah would be forgotten or altered, so Rebbi Yehudah HaNasi, the head of the Sanhedrin at the time, compiled the Oral Torah into the form we have today and we refer to this written compilation of the Oral Torah as the Mishnah.

However, there was discussion on its application, philosophy, ethics, what to do in different situations, the trying to grasp the essence of the law so it could be utilized in different, unenvisaged situations, the mysticism and the practical. These discussions were recorded in the Gemorah. This is how we get to the Talmud- it consists of two main parts- the Mishnah and then the associated Gemorah to that Mishnah.

In modern editions there are also multiple commentaries, footnotes, cross references to passages in the Torah, prophets and scriptures when they are mentioned etc. Typically it is published in 20 volumes- the ArtScroll translation is 73 volumes! It is not something that you just read but something that requires intense study and a teacher so you know how to study and understand the methodology utilized in the Talmud.

Moshe Kerr: No. Totally incorrect.

Rabbi Yechuda named his Mishna based upon the בנין אב/precedent that Moshe Rabbeinu named דברים the Mishna Torah — which means common law. The Mishna codified by Rabbi Yechuda in 210 ce follows the משנה תורה common law model established by the Book of דברים. The Common law legal system stands upon precedents. The Hebrew for precedent: בנין אב.

The Gemara, compiled by a later set of scholars AFTER Rabbi Yechuda “sealed” the Mishna, based upon the precedents of the sealing of the T’NaCH, which in its turn caused Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina to seal the Gemara in about 450 ce. The purpose of sealing this Oral Torah methodology of common law? To prevent some tumah perversion which would modify or change both T’NaCH and Talmud. These the sealed masoret/traditions, thereby protected, think fence around the Torah, from counterfeit imposters like the New Testament replacement theology, whose “good news” seeks to cause Jews to assimilate and intermarry with Goyim; to pervert the sealed masoret/traditions unto tumah avoda zarah – Old and new testaments.

A second primary purpose of sealing the masoret/traditions: that all downstream generations of Israel, they equally inherit the identical masoret; thereby preventing an equally vile Av tumah avoda zarah commonly known as ירידות הדורות – falsely understood, that later generations cannot dispute the rulings made by earlier generations. This Av-tumah avoda zarah collapses when confronted with Oral Torah logic which validates that no one generation enjoys a monopoly of Torah logic over later generations.

The correct understanding of ירידות הדורות refers to the idea of “domino effect”.

Talmud, which means learning (Yeshivot fail to learn Talmud, when they study Gemara.), the Gemara brings halachic precedents from across the Sha’s Bavli as בינין אב depth analysis. The purpose of learning by way of comparative similar precedents, (this unique Oral Torah logic format) the Common Law Baali Tosafot commentary/criticism of Rashi p’shat on the Talmud, none the less fundamentally erred and failed to learn a halachic precedent to re-interpret (משנה תורה) the k’vanna of the language of a Gemara sugya, to likewise employed that revised depth anaysis of that sugya of Gemara to re-interpret the Home Mishna which the Gemara brings outside precedent halachic sources to most essentially re-interpret the k’vanna of the language of Rabbi Yechuda’s specific Mishna. (A mouthful. Gemara re-interprets the language of the Mishna).

This failure of Reshonim scholarship went across the board, some Reshonim learned with greater clarity than did others. The B’hag, Rif, Rosh common law halachic commentaries, like the Baali Tosafot – correctly learned and understood the Gemara commentary, restricted to a specific Mishna as Common law. Not so the super-commentaries written on these excellent Reshonim commentaries of scholarship on Talmudic common law. The later scholars confused and perverted Talmudic common law unto Roman statute law. Students in Yeshivot across the world, never receive any instruction which differentiates between T’NaCH/Talmudic common law from Roman statute law. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued g’lut Jewry down through the Ages.

In like manner, and equally as bad: the Reshonim scholars abysmally failed to discern (One and All, they failed to make the מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה with discerns “like from like” the basis: which observance of all Torah and halachic mitzvot most fundamentally requires. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued Jewry down through the Ages. The Av/toldot relationship between tohor time-oriented commandments — from positive & negative “toldot” commandments, contained within the next three Books of the Written Torah. This primary/secondary relationship, its expressed throughout the entire Torah.

Even Rashi’s common law commentary to the Chumash (as opposed by his “טיפש פשט” reading of the Talmud, צריך עיין. Rashi changed his sh’itta of p’shat learning from Chumash to Talmud. Why? He correctly foresaw that the Church hated and feared the Talmud. Rashi changed his sh’itta of drosh/p’shat as learned from to Chumash, and contrasted by his sh’itta of p’shat, which more resembles the theory of Ibn Ezra on the Chumash. Rashi’s p’shat contradiction in effect changed his sh’itta of learning, which no Tanna or Amorah scholar ever did. Again, why? To prevent church barbarians to learn how to learn Talmud as common law! The Pope ordered the burning of the Talmud across France in 1242!

Reshonim scholarship disgracefully failed to note this fundamental contradiction in Rashi scholarship, as did the later Pilpul schools! Proof that the Reshonim learning had derailed itself and gone off-track. Why? Because the Reshonim and their later rabbinic lackeys failed to understand how the concept of ירידות הדורות refuted the Xtian avoda zarah known as “Free Will”.

ירידות הדורות: A colossal error made by a great Jewish leader: be it King Shlomo who built an assimilated Catholic-like Cathedral, rather than prioritize the judicial pursuit of justice; or the Rambam who perverted Talmudic common law unto Roman statute law. These two examples: Once a great sage/leader worships avoda zarah, (Shlomo perverted the priority of establishment of Federal Great/Small Sanhedrin courtrooms as the k’vanna of building the Beit HaMikdash), the Av tumah of this perversion which validates the 2nd Sinai Commandment, all down-stream generations likewise pursue this Av-tumah avoda zarah abomination, from generation to generation to generation! Hence the concept of ירידות הדורות invalidates the Xtian dogmatism of “Free Will”. The gospel rebuke: “by their fruits you shall know them” more closely expresses the k’vanna of ירידות הדורות.

The Torah mitzva of Moshiach does not learn from a NaCH sources as the Av tumah gospel avoda zarah declares. Torah mitzvot learn from Torah sources. Why? Because Moshe Rabbeinu, the greatest of all prophets. The failure of Reshonim scholarship to correctly grasp how the Chumash learns the mitzva of Moshiach (as just one example), proof of the cursed existence of g’lut Jewry who lacked the wisdom to do mitzvot לשמה.

The Torah operates upon a most basic: Av/Toldot relationship. The Book of בראשית, together with the tohor time-oriented commandments codification known as the Siddur, commands Av tohor time-oriented commandments. “Time” not tied to a watch, but rather to crisis situations which threaten the chosen Cohen people with Shoah; like Akadat Yitzak, or the mitzva to remove the sciatic nerve! The latter explained by targum Uziel. Esau approach “toast” Yaacov with an Army lead by 400 officers. NaCH precedents: D’vorah and HaDassah, whose רשות מצוה likewise defines the k’vanna of תפילת ערבית according to rabbi Yehoshua. Av tohor time-oriented commandments learn from women, that doing mitzvot with k’vanna — a רשות rather than a חיוב.

In the defence of the Reshonim: in the Gemara of ערבין the Baali Tosafot did not know how Rav Ashi could change the halachic dispute between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yose haGelili in favor of the latter. According to the כלל, the halacha should follow the opinion of rabbi Akiva. The Baali Tosafot clearly did not have access to the Targum Uziel. Otherwise, they would have understood that Rav Ashi’s recognition that Uziel agreed with the opinion expressed by rabbi Yose haGelili, and therefore changed the halacha expressed in that halachic dispute as recorded in the Gemara of ערובין.

Therefore, the First Book of the Torah serves as the Primary אב טהור זימן גרמא מצוות. The second, third, and forth Books of the Torah serves as the secondary ביטול תולדות מצוות; hence the B’hag ruled in his Hilchot G’dolot: that 100 blessings, nar shabbat, nar hannuka, kre’at m’gillah, Shemone Esrei דרבנן (as opposed to ק”ש דאורייתא etc) qualify likewise as mitzvot from the Torah!

The Rambam, whose Yad Chazaka perversion worshipped avoda zarah: (understood as a) assimilation b) intermarriage with Goyim), as opposed to the Xtian avoda zarah Av-tumah abomination, which erroneously translates avoda zarah as idolatry; the 30 year-war slaughtered as many as did WWI when western Europe’s population about 1/3rd of 20th Century European populations, over a debate over the catholic JeZeus crucifics and worship of saint statues.

The Rambam abomination of avoda zarah, his assimilation to ancient Greek logic, that fool did not understand the kabbalah of how Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic, interprets the k’vanna of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued Jewry down through the Ages.

The last and 5th Book of the Written Torah משנה תורה commands the generations to learn the Torah through the wisdom of common law ie Rabbi Yechuda and the Gemara sages as codified in the Talmud — based upon learning both Torah and NaCH as mussar common law. And likewise enforced and emphasized through the mitzva of lighting the lights of Hannukah.

The disasters of ירידות הדורות Av-tuma avoda zara, this opening question on Mishnaic common law, fails to equally differentiate Geonim Midrashic scholarship, which defines the contribution made by the Geonim 600 – 900 ce, much like as does the halachic codifications stamps Reshonim scholarship 950 – 1450 ce.

As the משל of a loom has its warp/weft relationship; the Talmud – has its unique designation – by its halacha/aggadita relationship. Midrash functions as the Geonim scholarship, which delved into the Aggadic portion of the Talmud.

Yeshivot across the world do not know how to learn, not only Midrash as the primary source-commentary which links the דרוש-פשט with T’NaCH prophetic mussar, but how to interpret the k’vanna of prophetic mussar from NaCH sources by independently bringing similar NaCH sugyot like the Gemara brings halachic precedents to learn the k’vanna of the Mishna.

This disgraceful ignorance similar to Yeshiva rabbinic scholarship whose drivel commentaries, some 300 super-commentaries written on Rashi’s chumash commentary, they all fail to inspire down-stream talmidim to study Rashi’s Chumash דרוש\פשט sh’itta of common law. Common law not read like a novel; it requires a search for similar precedent Cases. The halachic Oral Torah logic of רמז-סוד, links T’NaCH common law mussar to halachic ritual observances. The failure to the Yeshiva education system to teach this fundamental יסוד of all Talmudic scholarship. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued Jewry down through the Ages.

Marc Lipshitz  Been involved in counter missionary work for 20+ years

First you need to understand what the Mishnah is. When Moshe received the Torah on Har Sinai he spent forty days and nights studying it and getting taught the performance and explanations of it. Thus when he came down he had two things- the written Torah and the explanations and details of its performance. The written Torah is what is also known as the “Chamishe Sifrei Torah”, commonly translated as “The Five Books of Moses”. The explanations and details of performance were only passed on orally and are commonly referred to as the Oral Torah. Before the Bar Kochba revolt which resulted in the massive exile of the Jews 80 or so years after the destruction of the Second Temple Rabbi Akivah organized the oral law into a more organized and easier to teach format. After the Bar Kochba revolt with the bulk of the Jews in exile in different places (the difference to the prior Babylonian exile was that there the bulk of the Jews were in one place, albeit outside of Israel) there was a fear that the oral Torah would be forgotten or altered, so Rebbi Yehudah HaNasi, the head of the Sanhedrin at the time, compiled the Oral Torah into the form we have today and we refer to this written compilation of the Oral Torah as the Mishnah.

However, there was discussion on its application, philosophy, ethics, what to do in different situations, the trying to grasp the essence of the law so it could be utilized in different, unenvisaged situations, the mysticism and the practical. These discussions were recorded in the Gemorah. This is how we get to the Talmud- it consists of two main parts- the Mishnah and then the associated Gemorah to that Mishnah. In modern editions there are also multiple commentaries, footnotes, cross references to passages in the Torah, prophets and scriptures when they are mentioned etc. Typically it is published in 20 volumes- the ArtScroll translation is 73 volumes! It is not something that you just read but something that requires intense study and a teacher so you know how to study and understand the methodology utilized in the Talmud.

Moshe Kerr: No. Totally incorrect. Rabbi Yechuda named his Mishna based upon the בנין אב/precedent that Moshe Rabbeinu named דברים the Mishna Torah — which means common law. The Mishna codified by Rabbi Yechuda in 210 ce follows the משנה תורה common law model established by the Book of דברים. Common law legal system stand upon precedents. The Hebrew for precedent: בנין אב.

The Gemara, compiled by a later set of scholars AFTER Rabbi Yechuda “sealed” the Mishna, based upon the precedents of the sealing of the T’NaCH, caused Rav Ashi and Rav Ravina to seal the Gemara in about 450 ce. The purpose of sealing this Oral Torah methodology of common law, to prevent a perversion of the seal masoret/traditions from counterfeit imposters like the New Testament replacement theology to pervert the seal masoret/traditions unto tumah avoda zarah.

A second primary purpose of sealing the masoret/traditions: that all down stream generations of Israel inherit the identical masoret, thereby preventing an equal Av tumah avoda zarah commonly known as ירידות הדורות – understood that later generations cannot dispute the rulings made by earlier generations. This Av-tumah avoda zarah collapses when confronted with Oral Torah logic which validates that no one generation enjoys a monopoly of Torah logic over later generations.

The correct understanding of ירידות הדורות refers to the idea of “domino effect”.

Talmud, which means learning (Yeshivot fail to learn Talmud, when they study Gemara.), the Gemara brings halachic precedents from across the Sha’s Bavli as precedents. The purpose of the precedents, the Common Law Baali Tosafot commentary/criticism of Rashi p’shat on the Talmud, fundamentally erred and failed to learn a halachic precedent to re-interpret משנה תורה the k’vanna of the language of the Home Mishna which the Gemara brings outside precedent halachic sources to re-interpret the k’vanna of the language of Rabbi Yechuda’s specific Mishna.

This failure of Reshonim scholarship went across the board, some Reshonim better than others. The B’hag, Rif, Rosh common law halachic commentaries, like the Baali Tosafot – correctly learned and understood the Gemara commentary to a specific Mishna as Common law. Not so the super-commentaries written on these excellent Reshonim scholarship of Talmudic common law. The later scholars confused and perverted Talmudic common law unto Roman statute law. Students in Yeshivot across the world, never receive any instruction which differentiates between T’NaCH/Talmudic common law from Roman statute law. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued g’lut Jewry down through the Ages.

In like manner, and equally as bad: the Reshonim scholars abysmally failed to discern (One and All, they failed to make the מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה with discerns “like from like” the basis which observance of all Torah and halachic mitzvot most fundamentally require. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued Jewry down through the Ages. The Av/toldot relationship between tohor time-oriented from positive & negative toldot commandments.

Even Rashi’s common law commentary to the Chumash (as opposed by his טיפש פשט reading of the Talmud. Rashi changed his sh’itta of p’shat as learned from to Chumash and contrasted by his sh’itta of p’shat made upon the Talmud! Reshonim scholarship disgracefully failed to note this fundamental contradiction in Rashi scholarship. Proof that the Reshonim learning had derailed itself and gone off-track. Why? Because the Reshonim and later rabbinic lackeys failed to understand how the concept of ירידות הדורות refuted the Xtian avoda zarah known as “Free Will”.

A colossal error made by a great Jewish leader: be it King Shlomo who built an assimilated Catholic Cathedral or the Rambam who perverted Talmudic common law unto Roman statute law. Once a great sage/leader worships avoda zarah, (Shlomo perverted the priority of establishment of Federal Great/Small Sanhedrin courtrooms as the k’vanna of building the Beit HaMikdash), the Av tumah of this perversion which validates the 2nd Sinai Commandment, all down-stream generations likewise pursue this Av-tumah avoda zarah abomination, from generation to generation to generation! Hence the concept of ירידות הדורות invalidates the Xtian dogmatism of “Free Will”.

The Torah mitzva of Moshiach does not learn from a NaCH source. Torah mitzvot learn from Torah sources. Why? Because Moshe Rabbeinu, the greatest of all prophets. The failure of Reshonim scholarship to correctly grasp how the Chumash learns, proof of the cursed existence of g’lut Jewry who lacked the wisdom to do mitzvot לשמה.

The Torah operates upon a most basic: Av/Toldot relationship. The Book of בראשית, together with the tohor time-oriented commandments codification known as the Siddur, commands Av tohor time-oriented commandments. “Time” not tied to a watch, but rather to crisis situations which threaten the chosen Cohen people with Shoah; like Akadat Yitzak, or the mitzva to remove the sciatic nerve! The latter explained by targum Uziel. Esau approach “toast” Yaacov with an Army lead by 400 officers. NaCH precedents D’vorah and HaDassah whose רשות מצוה defines the k’vanna of תפילת ערבית according to rabbi Yehoshua. Av tohor time-oriented commandments learn from women that doing mitzvot with k’vanna — a רשות rather than a חיוב.

In the defence of the Reshonim: in the Gemara of ערבין the Baali Tosafot did not know how Rav Ashi could change the dispute between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yose haGelili. According to the כלל, the halacha should follow the opinion of r. Akiva. The Baali Tosafot clearly did not have access to the Targum Uziel. Otherwise, they would have understood that Rav Ashi’s recognition that Uziel agreed with the opinion expressed by rabbi Yose haGelili and therefore changed the halacha expressed in that halachic dispute as recorded in the Gemara of ערובין.

Therefore, the First Book of the Torah serves as the אב טהור זימן גרמא מצוות. The second, third, and forth Books of the Torah serves as the תולדות מצוות; hence the B’hag ruled in his Hilchot G’dolot: that 100 blessings, nar shabbat, nar hannuka, kre’at m’gillah, etc qualify as mitzvot from the Torah!

The Rambam, whose Yad Chazaka perversion worshipped avoda zarah: understood as a) assimilation b) intermarriage with Goyim, as opposed to the Xtian abomination which erroneously translates avoda zarah as idolatry; the 30 year-war slaughtered as many as did WWI when western Europe’s population about 1/3rd of 20th Century Eupean populations, over a debate over the catholic cruxifics and worship of saints.

The Rambam abomination of avoda zarah assimilation to ancient Greek logic, that fool did not understand the kabbalah of how Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס interprets the k’vanna of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued Jewry down through the Ages.

The last and 5th Book of the Written Torah משנה תורה commands the generations to learn the Torah through the wisdom of common law ie Rabbi Yechuda and the Gemara sages as codified in the Talmud.

The gravity of ירידות הדורות avoda zara, this question fails to address the Midrashic scholarship which defines the contribution made by the Geonim. As a loom has a warp/weft relationship, the Talmud has halacha/aggadita relationship. Midrash functions as the Geonim scholarship which delved into the Aggadic portion of the Talmud. Yeshivot across the world do not know how to learn, not only Midrash as the primary source-commentary which links the דרוש-פשט with T’NaCH prophetic mussar; like as learns Rashi’s Chumash p’shat. As contrasted by the halachic Oral Torah logic of רמז-סוד. A most basic and fundamental error. Which has plagued Jewry down through the Ages.